Castlevania Dungeon Forums

The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Chernabogue on April 03, 2011, 08:56:36 AM

Title: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Chernabogue on April 03, 2011, 08:56:36 AM
Sindra's thread about the Stop Watch theory inspired me to discuss this topic.

As some members said, they're HUGE holes in the timeline, universe or lore of the series (both in IGA's and LoS/Cox's). Things like that should be explained in next games, but we could discuss about it and try to find explanations or solutions until then (or never, haha). I have no idea about what we should start on, but each game has its own holes we can discuss. ;D
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Koutei on April 03, 2011, 09:26:40 AM
Similar old post

Castlevania - The Plot Hole Thread
http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php?topic=2407.0 (http://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/index.php?topic=2407.0)

This might serve as a reference.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Viper on April 03, 2011, 11:10:34 AM
"...what the fuck is that orb anyway?"
How Dracula does put candles onto air?
What's the point to have so many Chapels in "Dark Demon Lord Castle, muhohoho". Dracula is christian?
Why "Dracula wakes up every 100 years" when he actually wakes up four-five times more frequently?

When Simon beated Dracula first time, who dismembered Dracula in parts and hided them in all those mansions?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Danial on April 03, 2011, 04:55:50 PM
"...what the fuck is that orb anyway?"
How Dracula does put candles onto air?
What's the point to have so many Chapels in "Dark Demon Lord Castle, muhohoho". Dracula is christian?
Why "Dracula wakes up every 100 years" when he actually wakes up four-five times more frequently?

When Simon beated Dracula first time, who dismembered Dracula in parts and hided them in all those mansions?

I don't know if there's ever been an official explanation for what the orbs are, but I always saw them as the energy of the creature you destroyed.

IGA once was asked why candles give you items.  He replied that the candles were souls that had been trapped in Castlevania.  When you whip them, you are freeing them, so they thank you with an item.  If they are really trapped souls then they could technically be anywhere, even in mid air.

The chapels don't have to be Christian, they could be to worship Dracula since he's the Dark Lord.  Satanists practice similar ceremonies as Christians, theirs are just dedicated to a different god though.

Dracula can be resurrected any time with the correct ceremony.  It's only every 100 years that he resurrects naturally with his full power.

I think it was said that Dracula's followers scattered his body pieces around so that Simon couldn't just go back to his grave and put an end to his curse.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Successor The Cruel on April 03, 2011, 05:16:53 PM
Where in the blue blazes did Elizabeth come from?  Dracula's niece?  Huh!? : x
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 03, 2011, 05:26:04 PM
"...what the fuck is that orb anyway?"
I assume you mean the orb that drops after killing a boss that restores your health at the end of a level? It's just a game mechanic that made it a bit more fair when starting the next level so you weren't continuing on with 1 hit left.

The only possible way to describe that in an actual story-based logical sense would be to say it's the boss's life force transferring to the hero in order to replenish them. Doesn't make much sense though unless Belmont's have a relic that works like Alucard's Soul Steal.

How Dracula does put candles onto air?
Magic? Honestly, that's another game-based mechanic that made getting hearts and money a bit easier. That or the developers were just shyte when it came to making a better system. Having candles only in places were there was wall to explain how they were held would have excluded a lot of areas were they could be put, hence the easy/lazy way of doing it by just having candles floating in mid-air. For the sake of argument, I'll also be lazy and say they float due to magic.

What's the point to have so many Chapels in "Dark Demon Lord Castle, muhohoho". Dracula is christian?
According to Lament's story, Mathias was a devout Christian fighting in the holy Crusades. That's why it stung him so much when Elizabetha died - he thought that God was betraying all the love and loyalty Mathias had given him by taking his beloved wife away so young. He set out to denounce God and prove he would best God's divine cycle of life and death by becoming a vampire and never dying. When Mathias took for Castlevania and became Dracula, the chapels that were a part of the castle were kept as a mockery towards God. They were meant to be blasphemy. When Dracula met Lisa, perhaps the chapels took on a new meaning, and he kept at least one around for her sake - even after she died. Even though he was in a war against God, he wasn't going to subject his beloved to his views and hatreds. Maybe that's why they show up in games centuries after her death - he kept them there in Lisa's memory.

Why "Dracula wakes up every 100 years" when he actually wakes up four-five times more frequently?
Dracula's natural resurrection cycle, brought about by the power of the Demon Castle, is every 100 years. After those 100 years, Dracula is supposedly resurrected with full power. However, as has been made clear, those with enough dark power and resources can resurrect Dracula prematurely - before the 100-year cycle is complete. Death, Shaft, Carmilla, Barlowe and Elizabeth Bartley have all managed to resurrect Dracula before the 100 year anniversary. However, it has been stated that due to being resurrected prematurely, Dracula is not at his full power at those times.

When Simon beated Dracula first time, who dismembered Dracula in parts and hided them in all those mansions?
I believe it was Simon himself who dismembered Dracula. In Germanic and Slavic folklore, it was a common practice to decapitate a vampire after slaying it, and separating the body parts. This was believed to guarantee the vampire could not heal itself and rise again. (or in some real-life stories, it was a way to hasten the departure of the soul from the vampire's body)
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: DragonSlayr81 on April 03, 2011, 05:50:32 PM
My question would be, why did the Belmonts have to go in hiding during the 1800s adn the VK whip had to be given to the Morris clan to take up the reigns in their absense. No real official word has been stated, only fan speculation involving Richter being "tainted" when Shaft possessed him in SotN.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Nagumo on April 03, 2011, 06:02:16 PM
What happend after the OoS cliffhanger? And what about the Simon's Quest one?  :(
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: crisis on April 03, 2011, 06:04:12 PM
What dark force was behind Maria's transformation, that it didn't matter to Alucard?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 03, 2011, 06:23:10 PM
Where in the blue blazes did Elizabeth come from?  Dracula's niece?  Huh!? : x

This is another theory of mine that I was going to write into its own separate article, but I supposed here is as good a place as any.

Elizabeth Bartley - the "niece" of Count Dracula who was introduced in Castlevania Bloodlines, and based on Erzsébet Báthory from Hungarian history. In the games, she is a vampire who associates with Dracula as her uncle, and was executed in the early 1600's for vampirism, and later resurrected by the witch Drolta Tzuentes in the early 1900's. How does she fit into the scheme of things?

It is said Mathias "became" Dracula at some point before Dracula's Curse in 1476 (which is the historical year the real Vlad Tepes "died", so the timeframe is the same), and Vlad Tepes had several brothers, at least two of whom reached adulthood. It could be said that either of these brothers of Vlad sired offspring, making them the nephews and nieces of Vlad himself. Therefore, Elizabeth could very well be a niece of the human Vlad Tepes, several generations removed. Mathias taking over Vlad's life/stealing Vlad's lifeforce would make Elizabeth's claim still hold some validity, especially since the historical Bathory's uncle was a Voivode (governor) of Transylvania - which Vlad III had been at one point as were his brothers after him.

Elizabeth Bathory was historically a countess who married the son of a Baron and managed his estates while he was away. He ended up supposedly dying while at war with the Ottomans and she inherited everything. Now, according to the Castlevania timeline, this timeframe would be between the games Castlevania: The Adventure and Belmont's Revenge. Bathory/Bartley would have been a very influential person in the same area that Dracula would be in - having fled the battle with Christopher Belmont and biding his time until his power grew back. Dracula would need minions and power, and here was Bathory/Bartley - having the land, power and influence he could use. It would be nothing for Dracula to present himself to Elizabeth, claim familial relations to her in order to coerce her aid, and turn her into a vampire. She supplies him with servants and shelter for him to recover his power, and he turns her into a immortal bloodsucker. Win/Win for them both.

This would also coincide with Bathory's reign of terror in Hungary beginning just after Dracula's defeat in Belmont's Revenge. A few years after Dracula's death at the hands of Christopher in 1591, rumor begin persisting around Hungary of horrific torture and blood-draining Bathory was committing against the daughters of lesser nobility who had placed them in her care in order to teach them, as well as the murder of several maids and other female servants in her castle of Čachtice. She convicted of the murders and died in early 1600's. Historically, Bathory died after years of house arrest in a set of walled-up rooms. The Castlevania history lists Bartley of dying around the same time, but of being burned at the stake after being discovered as a vampire. Either way, after her death, somewhere between 100 and 200 corpses were found in the Čachtice castle - earning her the nickname "The Blood Countess".

Due to her starting out as a human member of nobility, then becoming a bloodthirsty vampire, in the Castlevania universe it wouldn't be hard to assume the "Bathory" name and "Bartley" name could have been separated (by Hungarian officials or covered up by the Vatican) in order to avoid the public from mass hysteria if they found out vampires existed.



THAT is my theory, anyway.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Munchy on April 03, 2011, 06:23:57 PM
How is it that the Vampire Killer changes from a leather whip to a chain whip to a shiny whip all the time?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ahasverus on April 03, 2011, 06:37:49 PM
Sindra, you have the most interesting theories about the old saga I have EVER read. My God Konami needs you right NOW it's awesome how you connect things, they make sense and they are intriguing at the same time!  Congrats man!  ;D
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: crisis on April 03, 2011, 06:40:29 PM
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv119%2Fc0mbat%2FUntitled-12.png&hash=55af867cdd26123e607945b1a31824b81f53dc5f)
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Kingshango on April 03, 2011, 07:03:04 PM
How is it that the Vampire Killer changes from a leather whip to a chain whip to a shiny whip all the time?

The power of love?

jk, Maybe it has something to do with alchemy I guess.

Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Dremn on April 03, 2011, 08:24:31 PM
What is the point of the orbs?

Why doesn't Simon wear any pants?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 03, 2011, 08:57:00 PM
Sindra, you have the most interesting theories about the old saga I have EVER read. My God Konami needs you right NOW it's awesome how you connect things, they make sense and they are intriguing at the same time!  Congrats man!  ;D

Thanks, Ahasverus. I am all about story and plot in my games. Honestly, nothing excites me more than solid gameplay paired with a strong and compelling or deep and layered plotlines. I loved when things connect together, especially if it makes sense in multiple ways. When it comes to Castlevania, this desire to see a compelling plot where everything ties together is almost a compulsion for me.

That, and I like to see it as a challenge to try and explain things that were previously thought as nonsense or make logical sense of something that may have been seen as illogical otherwise.

Crisis - I remember seeing that (in the Portrait of Ruin timeline, right?), and have been waiting for it ever since. How long ago was that? It very well might have been an idea that was either scrapped or shelved. Even if it's not, holy hell do I hope my theory is somewhere close to what they were thinking, mainly because I think my story would hold the a sizable amount of weight. (tooting my own horn there, yes)
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: whitedragon_nall on April 03, 2011, 09:03:08 PM
Why doesn't Simon wear any pants?

Easier access to his "whip"....

I hope my theory is somewhere close to what they were thinking, mainly because I think my story would hold the a sizable amount of weight. (tooting my own horn there, yes)

Nothing wrong with tooting you own horn, especially with such a well-thought out theory like that. Konami needs to give us that game already.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 03, 2011, 09:21:37 PM
My question would be, why did the Belmonts have to go in hiding during the 1800s adn the VK whip had to be given to the Morris clan to take up the reigns in their absense. No real official word has been stated, only fan speculation involving Richter being "tainted" when Shaft possessed him in SotN.

That's just the thing - there's been no explanation. Keep in mind that it's only been since Portrait of Ruin that the whole idea that the Morris clan had to be given custodianship of the whip came about as a plot point. Before that, we just assumed ownership of the whip passed to the Schneider and Morris offshoots of the family due to complications within the main Belmont branch family - either someone didn't have a child who was capable of taking up the whip and they had to wait another generation or two, or something else came about - and then the whip eventually returned to the main house with Julius in 1999.

Perhaps Shaft's possession of Richter corrupted the Belmont power, and there had to be sufficient time given for that corruption to be bred out of the main family bloodline before they could wield the whip's full power again. There's also the possibility that Shaft left a curse on Richter much like Dracula left a curse on Simon - a curse that was passed onto Richter's children and grandchildren that prevented the ability to use the Vampire Killer whip to its full capacity.

The latter theory makes a TON of sense if you think about it - if Shaft had the foresight before his death to instill Richter with a curse that would prevent future generations of his bloodline to use the Vampire Killer whip, it would be absolutely devastating to the Belmonts and would almost assuredly clinch Dracula's victory during his next future resurrection. Granted, Shaft couldn't have thought ahead to the possibility that Belmont branch families would find ways to wield the power of the VK whip to fight Dracula, but even still - if the main family couldn't fight using the whip, it would throw a serious monkey wrench into things. That is, until a way to break the curse was found - which, lets face it, wouldn't be out of the question if it was the type of curse that couldn't be broken until a certain amount of time had passed or a certain number of generations had been born.

So the Belmont main family, without the main weapon in their arsenal, goes into hiding in order to avoid attacks by Dracula's followers. They entrust the whip and their knowledge to the Morris and Schneider branch families and their associates, and begin a self-imposed exile until they have beaten the curse and can once again wield the whip and take back their destiny.

My thoughts.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: A-Yty on April 03, 2011, 09:25:13 PM
What are the energy orbs and who makes them and why?

Why are hearts collected?

Why does Dracula have an army of mythological monsters from around the world?

Why does Dracula's memory keep getting reset?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: crisis on April 03, 2011, 09:58:07 PM
Quote from: Sindra
I remember seeing that (in the Portrait of Ruin timeline, right?), and have been waiting for it ever since. How long ago was that? It very well might have been an idea that was either scrapped or shelved. Even if it's not, holy hell do I hope my theory is somewhere close to what they were thinking, mainly because I think my story would hold the a sizable amount of weight. (tooting my own horn there, yes)

That was released back in '06, it would've been interested had they pursued that.

also,

how come there is no Morris in OoE?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ahasverus on April 03, 2011, 10:39:56 PM
That was released back in '06, it would've been interested had they pursued that.

also,

how come there is no Morris in OoE?
OOE is just before Bram Stoker's Dracula, we don't know if Quincy inherited the whip, perhaps he found it, perhaps he bought it in the persian market or ebay we don't know :P
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 03, 2011, 11:10:02 PM
how come there is no Morris in OoE?

Well, the Morris clan could have come about after OoE. Ecclesia happened during the early 1800's, yes? The United States of America was only officially declared a country in 1776. The migration of Romanians to the US started in the second half of the 19th century, so chances are any Belmont descendants who emigrated to America and married into the Morris family might have happened just AFTER OoE.  That is, however, if the Morris's pre-Belmont were already established in America. Morris is a largely English and Welsh surname, so there's a chance a Belmont moved to either of those countries beforehand and married, then emigrated to America. It depends where in the family a Belmont had a daughter and that daughter married into the Morris family and started the branch-Belmont family.

I always had a tendency to think Richter had daughters who married into the Morris and Schneider clans respectively, and had a son that carried on the Belmont surname. (This would make Reinhardt probably Richter's grandson in theory and Quincy Richter's great grandson - if we think is terms of age) However, this would contradict my previous theory on Richter being cursed and passing that down to his kids so they couldn't use the whip - unless the curse specifically targeted those who held the surname Belmont, but that's a stretch.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: darkwzrd4 on April 03, 2011, 11:16:30 PM
What I want to know is what was doing between SotN and the Demon Castle War.  All we know is that at the end of SotN he is walking away saying that it would be best is he just disappeared.  OoE states that the Belmonts disappeared and there was no one else to fight Dracula.  This posses the question:  Where the hell was Alucard at that time!?  Even if the Belmonts weren't around, surely Alucard would be able to pick up the slack.  
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 03, 2011, 11:36:38 PM
What are the energy orbs and who makes them and why?

Game mechanic like all others. But for a more in-depth response they are orbs of light. I can't remember which CV instruction booklet it was that I read it in, But it was explained that after a foe was defeated an Orb of light would appear to replenish your health. Beyond this explanation I know nothing else.

Why does Dracula have an army of mythological monsters from around the world?

In the CV universe, Dracula is the embodiment of all that is evil (before IGA introduced Satan  :P). It would only be natural for those who're also of an evil nature to gather at Castlevania and serve the dark lord.

Why does Dracula's memory keep getting reset?

I've never heard of this explanation before. I'm curious as to where you've read it.

Why are hearts collected?

Like the orbs, it's another game mechanic. But I'll leave it up to Sindra to best explain it  :)

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 03, 2011, 11:37:21 PM
What I want to know is what was doing between SotN and the Demon Castle War.  All we know is that at the end of SotN he is walking away saying that it would be best is he just disappeared.  OoE states that the Belmonts disappeared and there was no one else to fight Dracula.  This posses the question:  Where the hell was Alucard at that time!?  Even if the Belmonts weren't around, surely Alucard would be able to pick up the slack.  

He is around one year after the events of Symphony in Nocturne of Recollection to help defeat the incubus Magnus.

Judgment states (and keep in mind that Judgment is widely believed as non-canon) that "In the age of no Belmonts, Alucard witnesses Dracula rising and falling many times. He begins to seek a way in which he could permanently destroy his father. When the Vampire Hunter whip is passed down to the Morris Clan, he creates the Alucard Spear with the intention of it supporting the Vampire Killer whip, and he bequeaths it to the Lecarde Clan (some speculate these are his descendants). "

Even without Judgment being canon, I will admit this statement holds some validity. Alucard doesn't want to be the one directly fighting his father. In both Dracula's Curse and even in Symphony, he expressed deep hesitation at the idea of battling against his father because, even though he's the lord of vampires and prince of darkness, Alucard knew him only as his father growing up as a family together with Lisa, and even stuck with his father after Lisa's death. It makes perfect sense that Alucard would much rather enable the Belmont, their descendants, and any other group willing to take up the battle against Dracula instead. So he created the Alucard/Alcarde Spear for the Lecardes, and more than likely helped in other ways. (he might have had a annonymous hand in Ecclesia's research into the science of Glyphs as well, to use as a weapon against Dracula)

So in my mind, Alucard laid low until the time of the Nostradamus Prophecies that would come to pass in 1999. By then, he'd probably affiliated himself with the Vatican and gained vast worldly knowledge in a effort to devise a final solution to banishing Dracula's power once and for all.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: crisis on April 03, 2011, 11:52:51 PM
Wired News: Last question. Why does Dracula keep putting meat inside the walls of his castle?

IGA: You should ask, why do they eat it! I’ve thought about this stuff. I’ve actually thought about the candles. The candles are people’s souls that were taken by Death or by the vampires. In Japan there are candles that represent life. So, when you release the souls from the candles by whipping them, they give you a "thank you" present. Thank-you hearts, or thank-you holy water. The meat, I have no idea.

http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2007/10/interview-iga-t/ (http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2007/10/interview-iga-t/)
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 04, 2011, 12:23:13 AM
Like the orbs, it's another game mechanic. But I'll leave it up to Sindra to best explain it  :)

I appreciate you guys are referring to me as a sort of "Loremaster" now. =P


Ok, so hearts. Hearts, in the original line of games (From CV1 - Rondo) are used as ammunition for your sub-weapons. In games such as Symphony, they replenish magic. But why use hearts, and not something else? Why not coins or gems or simply have random drops that either give you a new weapon or increase the amount of the one you already have?

Like was already mentioned, candles have been explained to be created using the souls of Dracula's victims. When a candle is destroyed, the soul is released. What if not only the soul of a person was used to create the candles, but a part of their "heart" was as well. The association between a human soul and the metaphysical "heart" can be used interchangeably, though some schools of thought separate them as the "soul" being the essence of a person's life-force and the "heart" being what connects that soul to the person's earthly body. (hence why if a person is killed and they remain on earth as ghosts, it's because their "heart" is still somehow chained to the earthly physical realm through unfinished business such as love or vengeance)

So when a candle is destroyed, and the soul is freed, they give a small part of their own "heart" to the hero who freed them. Since the soul and the metaphysical heart are connected and can be one-in-the-same, they have similar power. It's a chunk of that soul's lingering life-force So, since it can be said a Belmont's power is fueled by their uniquely-powerful life-force, the extra piece of the freed soul's "heart" is like a little boost in that hero's power, giving them a little extra replenishment that they can use to fuel their amazing abilities with sub-weapons. Same when a enslaved monster is killed, is leaves a piece of its life-force behind in the form of a "heart".


Best possible explanation I have.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: danceofgold on April 04, 2011, 01:05:19 AM
I love your theories, Sindra. You totally need to work in Konami.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ahasverus on April 04, 2011, 01:47:08 AM
Sindra man, please help me with this one:
Are we sure if there's only one Belmont bloodline or could the whip be inherited by another Belmont who isn't son of the last weilder? Juste's nephew being the weilder if he has no sons, or is every Belmont hunter a direct descendant of the last one?

About Alucard: I think his hestiation for fighting his father comes from certain fear of "catching" darkness in him, we've heard that he has too similar powers to his father (The drama states they are the same even) and the darkness certainly want him in their side, and quoting the drama again (as bad as it is, is the most extensive insight into Alucard's personality we have) he's really afraid of himself telling Maria not to come with him because he as a "dark side". That could be the reason he prefers to be a witness and not having direct "hands-on" participation in the fight.

In my humble opinion, Sindra has the power to restore the old saga to the point we don't even need the reboot anymore :P
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: darkwzrd4 on April 04, 2011, 01:53:50 AM
He is around one year after the events of Symphony in Nocturne of Recollection to help defeat the incubus Magnus.

Judgment states (and keep in mind that Judgment is widely believed as non-canon) that "In the age of no Belmonts, Alucard witnesses Dracula rising and falling many times. He begins to seek a way in which he could permanently destroy his father. When the Vampire Hunter whip is passed down to the Morris Clan, he creates the Alucard Spear with the intention of it supporting the Vampire Killer whip, and he bequeaths it to the Lecarde Clan (some speculate these are his descendants). "

Even without Judgment being canon, I will admit this statement holds some validity. Alucard doesn't want to be the one directly fighting his father. In both Dracula's Curse and even in Symphony, he expressed deep hesitation at the idea of battling against his father because, even though he's the lord of vampires and prince of darkness, Alucard knew him only as his father growing up as a family together with Lisa, and even stuck with his father after Lisa's death. It makes perfect sense that Alucard would much rather enable the Belmont, their descendants, and any other group willing to take up the battle against Dracula instead. So he created the Alucard/Alcarde Spear for the Lecardes, and more than likely helped in other ways. (he might have had a annonymous hand in Ecclesia's research into the science of Glyphs as well, to use as a weapon against Dracula)

So in my mind, Alucard laid low until the time of the Nostradamus Prophecies that would come to pass in 1999. By then, he'd probably affiliated himself with the Vatican and gained vast worldly knowledge in a effort to devise a final solution to banishing Dracula's power once and for all.
I thought that the Lecardes were just another offshoot of the Belmonts.  As far as I know, Alucard never had any children and probably didn't want to.  I mean he even says that "the blood that flows in my veins is cursed.  t'would be best for the world if I disappeared forever."  I can't see him bringing a child like him into the world.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 04, 2011, 02:28:10 AM
Sindra man, please help me with this one:
Are we sure if there's only one Belmont bloodline or could the whip be inherited by another Belmont who isn't son of the last wielder? Juste's nephew being the wielder if he has no sons, or is every Belmont hunter a direct descendant of the last one?


Isn't that the point of the branch families? A female Belmont has yet to wield the whip, but obviously her children or grandchildren did because we have the Morris and Schneider clans able to use the whip. Therefore they were the nephews and great-nephews of the last male Belmont wielder. It can be done.



darkwxrd4 - If Nocturne of Recollection is to be believed (and I am fairly certain its canon), the best ending of Symphony of the Night where Maria runs after Alucard to be with him actually happened, because they are living together a year later. From this scenario, it can be pretty much tacked up on the billboard that Alucard and Maria end up a romantic couple and have children. (chances are she talked him out of being emo and mopey about his cursed blood) This is further backed up by the heavy hints that the Lecarde's are the descendants of Maria and Alucard (Renard + Alucard = Lecarde? Sounds as plausible as anything. In those times a woman having children unwed was looked down upon, so combing the surnames into something new to avoid suspicion would make sense) Maria is a distant Belmont descendant, so she'd be where the Lecarde's Belmont genes came from.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 04, 2011, 02:32:35 AM
Also, anyone ever wonder how the Belmont's were able to item crash with their sub-weapons? How was a hero with seemingly only a few knives on their person able to dish out a blazing torrent of several dozen knives in the span of a few seconds? Able to summon multiple axes when they obviously weren't carrying them all previously?

My theory on that is in the same vein as my one on the hearts. A Belmont's power comes from not just their ability with the Vampire Killer, but from their high degree of manipulating the metaphysical. Perhaps this comes from exposure to alchemy; perhaps its something bestowed upon them from a higher power; perhaps its both. Regardless, they can perform feats beyond normal hunters because of control over their own unique life-force. This is evident that they can combine and amplify the holy properties of the Cross into the huge Cross item crash. Using this same idea, taking a blessed knife, and being able to manipulate their life-force into making knife-replicas to throw in succession (almost like after-images) that deal similar damage as the original knife, would not be out of the realm of their power. Same with axes - create life-force replicas of the weapon in order to throw them out in multiple directions for increased damage.

This would facilitate the need for "hearts", or the tiny bits of life-force left behind by the souls of the victims they release from either candles or enslaved enemies. It acts as a replenishment to the life-force of the Belmont so they can continue the use of the sub-weapons. Same with magic - magic is widely believed to be fueled by a person's life-force as much as from nature. Portrait of Ruin helps the idea in the idea that the duel crush "1000 Blades" was fueled by Jonathan's and Charlotte's life-forces combined - magic and inbred ability both used to not only create the same effect of creating the multiple knives, but amplifying it by drawing on them both.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Flame on April 04, 2011, 02:40:24 AM
On the matter of chapels-

My opinion:

while they may just be chapels of some church of chaos, it is possible that it is supposed to be some form of regret in Dracula. or some sort of deeply buried need to "make it up" to God or something. something which would culminate in his resurrection as Soma, Mathias' "second chance".

Id like to know-

in Symphony, at the end, when Alucard tells him Lisa's final words, to not harm humans, he seems to have made his peace with her, understanding her wish.

And yet... later games, he's back, ready to kill some humans despite Lisa's wishes.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 04, 2011, 03:51:46 AM
My theory on that is in the same vein as my one on the hearts. A Belmont's power comes from not just their ability with the Vampire Killer, but from their high degree of manipulating the metaphysical. Perhaps this comes from exposure to alchemy; perhaps its something bestowed upon them from a higher power; perhaps its both

The Belmont clan has always had supreme powers over that of ordinary people. Even in LoI Leon's inner powers enhanced the vampirekiller without the aid of of Alchamy. This being the case I can assume it's something more on the lines of spirituality. But I only think it's for some of the item crashes and not all of them. Richter is also an accomplished martial artist as seen in RoB and SotN. His ability to throw multiple daggers in a rapid-fire motion can easily be done with martial arts. A question I would really like the answer to is 'when' did the Belmont family first become endowed with such power? You've still got a lotta good explanations going there Sindra. Can't wait to read'em.

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: DragonSlayr81 on April 04, 2011, 04:47:01 AM
Chapels: I thinK Dracula includes chapels in his castle not as a means of representing Christianity more than a means to mock God. Dracula's chapels are anything BUT holy. Even the earliest depiction in the series, with CV1's Red Brick Cathedral, featured Medusa's bust on the altar(as if it was the idol of worship).

Orbs: Originally, game-wise, they seemed to solely be a means of replenishing health after defeating a boss(like hearts, some video games back in the day did this type of thing). In the games, LoI showed that the orbs had some significance. They each were part of the seal that opened the way to Walter's Pagoda of the Misty Moon, and each were held by the five bosses of Walter's castle. They were also treated like relics, and Leon could use them, combining their abilties with sub-weapons for different effects.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Flame on April 04, 2011, 05:52:47 AM
Yeah, I liked how LoI did that. way to take a spin on an unexplained gameplay mechanic.

thing is though, in the original vania, you even got one for beating Dracula. Which was ridiculous.

its the same as the red orbs you can pick up from enemies in Megaman 1. points. only here they replenish health too.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: A-Yty on April 04, 2011, 10:45:58 AM
thing is though, in the original vania, you even got one for beating Dracula. Which was ridiculous.

Not really. It was cool and dramatic. Especially since you got that final victory jingle and the game begins a new round  8)

When religion was still deeply rooted in the game's mythology, I liked to think the Holy Spirit or the Poltergeist King was the one who dropped that energy orb to help the hero.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Flame on April 04, 2011, 02:48:06 PM

When religion was still deeply rooted in the game's mythology,

it still isnt?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 04, 2011, 03:52:29 PM
A question I would really like the answer to is 'when' did the Belmont family first become endowed with such power?


Leon was an amazing fighter and had years of experience battling in the Crusades. This gave him an edge most people didn't have in terms of fighting steep odds. I'm not certain if he had any innate spiritual power, other than sheer willpower and tenacity, that would have given him a greater advantage over another person put in his shoes. The Vampire Killer resonated with him because it was created using the tainted soul of the person he loved most, and who loved him most in return - Sara. This could be said to be a combination of the power of alchemy used to create the whip in the first place, and the power of the human spirit to not only go through the sorrow of the ordeal, but still hold fast to the ideals and push forward despite the tragic nature. I think *that* is when the spiritual powers of the Belmont clan began to truly bud. Resonance with the whip (a sort of symbiosis that would provide power to both through both) and a growth of the human spirit beyond what a normal person would be able to endure helped to strengthen Leon and his descendant's resolve, along with the devout pledge to God and the protection of the innocent against the overwhelming odds against them in the form of vampires in general, and more specifically Dracula.

It's been said that hope and the human spirit are the most difficult things for demons and evil to break - and with the sorrow Leon overcame and the strength he received from it, the Belmont's from then on became the humans with probably the greatest amounts of both of those attributes - something that would be seen as a bane against all forces of evil. How else could a single Belmont have the courage and resolve to march into battle with not only Dracula, but hundreds if-not thousands of his undead and demonic minions across probably miles of befouled lands and corrupted castle that themselves were out to get him? Nothing more than supreme power of the human spirit and the instilled hope of past generations of Belmont's and townsfolk alike could push a hunter into accepting those odds, yet the Belmont's did.

Couple this with the relics the Belmont's gathered over the centuries, the skills and techniques each generation was able to learn and hand down to the next (more than likely some interaction with eastern cultures that resulted in martial combat fighting skills being added, like was evident with Richter), and continuing growth of their spirituality and continued increased control over their metaphysical powers - and you pretty much have the legacy of how the Belmont's became the greatest and most revered vampire hunters in history.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 04, 2011, 04:47:32 PM
No wonder all other hunter are jealous, even Charlie Vincent scoffed at Reinhardt for claiming he was out to destroy Dracula. Pfft! whattever Charlie. Take a back seat and let the Belmonts do THEIR job.

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on April 04, 2011, 06:30:32 PM
He just thought he was a greenhorn rookie as opposed to an experienced oldtimer.  It was more of an age thing.  Plus Reinhardt didn't have the "Belmont" surname.  I think it would've been cool if the conversation continued something like "I'm not just an obstinate youth.  I am a descentant of the Belmont Clan" and then Charlie Vincent would said something like "Oh I see!  But you're still so young.  Do not push forward foolishly, I warn you!"

But Reinhardt didn't mention it. :P
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 05, 2011, 01:07:47 AM
Id like to know-

in Symphony, at the end, when Alucard tells him Lisa's final words, to not harm humans, he seems to have made his peace with her, understanding her wish.

And yet... later games, he's back, ready to kill some humans despite Lisa's wishes.

In that regard, I believe Dracula might be partly influenced by outside means.

Dracula, by that point, had become a force of nature. This is evident in his resurrection cycle and his feeding off of the dark and evil emotions of the humans in the world. I honestly believe that, to a certain degree, that same malice and chaos that humanity exhibits that help to empower Dracula also influence him. Dracula's personality can sometimes differ between resurrections, and this could be due to being affected by the humans in the immediate area. In some depictions, vampires have a certain degree of empathic abilities -this enables them to read the emotions of their victims in order to better seduce or battle them. Due to Dracula being the most powerful vampire, his empathic abilities would more than likely be greater. He can certainly feel the darkness in men's hearts - it's what feeds him. What if Dracula was swayed by these same feelings and emotions?

Perhaps Alucard's love for his father influenced Dracula's words and thoughts after his defeat in Symphony of the Night. It's a plausible idea - that a strong enough love would placate Dracula. Certainly this could have been how he was able to find the love of Lisa and maintain it, despite the misery and hate that humanity radiated and that Dracula no doubt could sense. Maybe at those times, the opposite emotions canceled each other out and Dracula was able to simply be just that - a man, lamenting his sins against his beloved family, if but briefly. However, he didn't have these factors in future games - no strong positive emotions to counteract the negative ones. Hell, even the heroes had nothing but negative feelings against Dracula. No doubt this shift back to being the focal point of the world's chaos and misery and hate clouded Dracula's mindset. He may have truly meant to have Lisa's forgiveness, but he simply couldn't help himself. He was what he was - the Prince of Darkness and Lord of Vampires.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ahasverus on April 05, 2011, 01:15:15 AM
That makes sense... LOT of sense  :o you keep impressing me Master Librarian Sindra!
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: darkwzrd4 on April 05, 2011, 02:31:04 AM
Well, as AoS informs us, Dracula uses the power of Chaos and being that the castle is a product of Dracula's magic, a stream of Chaos exists with in the castle.  That is why the castle keeps changing and also why Soma almost turned evil in AoS.  Dracula (or whoever is lord of the castle) is in essence possessed by the Chaos, which is pure evil.  This is why Dracula is so powerful and so evil.  It's possible that Dracula's love for Lisa was great enough to keep the influence of Chaos in check.  In other words, her presence my have kept the Chaos from controlling Dracula.  With her gone, there is nothing keeping the Chaos from manipulating Dracula's behavior. 

On another topic, I have a question.  Dracula seeks to exterminate all humans, right?  Yet, he has human followers and underlings like the devilforgemasters (Hector and Issac) and the dark priest Shaft.  So, why does he allow them to serve him and live in the castle?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: alex085 on April 05, 2011, 02:29:49 PM
Sindra, you and I have come to some pretty similar theories, exactly so in the case of the stop watch and how the Belmonts improved, you're a great writer.  I'm creative writing major who loves Castlevania so I put theories to everything, we should talk in pm!  I'm going to start a topic I think you'll like called "Story edits" asking how you'd write or re-write the stories of certain games, hope you join in.

Ok... my theories.

First off I believe that Dracula can be resurrected at anytime, but it is times that break the 100 year mark that weaken him, reviving him not at full power.  However I do not think he can ever just pop back on his own, as this has never been shown to be the case.  It also seems that premature resurrection lengthens the amount of time it takes for him to be revived at full power.  Whenever serious strain is put on his spirit it increases the amount of time needed for it to "recharge" so to speak.

I also think that the reason Shanoa is "the only one" who can wield Dominus is because she is either the child or grandchild of Alucard and Maria.  I also think Albus is in the same vein as hector or Isaac in terms of how he is different from normal people.  If you read the Manga you'll know what I mean.  I also wouldn't be surprised if Barlow had some ties to Shaft, i don't think he was ever a good guy.

I would post more, but Sindra you really were very close to most of mine in the questions in this thread.  In the case of the Scneider/Morris thing, I just make my Reinhart the first Morris VK wielder in my re-write =) you'll see in the thread.  Scneider can be a code name. lol
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Flame on April 07, 2011, 05:54:45 AM
This isnt something Id like explained exactly, just something I want to note.

It pisses me off, and always has, that Chronicles/Ayami Simon Belmont carries a sword with him as well as the whip, and he even weilds them both in his artwork, BUT YOU NEVER ACTUALLY GET TO USE A SWORD.

God damn, at least give him the sword as a secondary weapon!
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: DarkPrinceAlucard on April 07, 2011, 02:36:53 PM
This isnt something Id like explained exactly, just something I want to note.

It pisses me off, and always has, that Chronicles/Ayami Simon Belmont carries a sword with him as well as the whip, and he even weilds them both in his artwork, BUT YOU NEVER ACTUALLY GET TO USE A SWORD.

God damn, at least give him the sword as a secondary weapon!

Yea I have always questioned that myself.

It would be nice to have a belmont wield both a sword and whip similiar to what Reinhardt did in Castlevania 64.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Chernabogue on April 07, 2011, 03:28:43 PM
Because a whip is DAMN MORE EPIC than a sword.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on April 07, 2011, 04:06:38 PM
Simon DOES get to use a Sword...
...in Haunted Castle.
A Mace, too.

So yeah, he does 'know' how to use a Sword.

Also, originally that sheath was for a dagger (in the original X68000 artwork).  Most/All Belmonts have a shortsword/dagger sheath.  I guess Ayami Kojima just took the idea and ran with it and turned it into a sword sheath instead.  The only proficient shortsword wielders are Simon Belmont (Haunted Castle version) and Reinhardt Schneider, who actively uses it as his short-range weapon.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: darkwzrd4 on April 07, 2011, 04:33:58 PM
Leon is probably proficient with a sword too.  I mean he was a knight who fought with a sword.  The only reason he didn't use it in LoI is because as he said: "I have a sword just not with me.  It belongs to the company."  At which point, Rinaldo says: "Honest to a fault."  In other words, even though Leon didn't bring the sword he normally uses with him is that it doesn't really belong to him and being he gave up being a knight to save Sara.  Since he quit the company, he had no right to take that sword and use it to save Sara.  However, I think it would have been cool if you spent the first part of the game wielding a sword.  It could have been like this:

For the first part of the game, Leon uses his sword.  However, at some point, it starts to become less and less effective.  Noticing that, Leon pays a visit to Rinaldo and tells him what is happening.  At which point, Rinaldo gives him the whip of alchemy saying that it's more powerful than any standard sword.  From this point on the game would proceed with Leon using the whip and having to sacrifice Sara in order to change the whip into the vampire killer, which is the only thing that can kill Walter.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: xscientist5000 on April 10, 2011, 03:47:38 AM
Long time reader, first time.. member. Don't know if this was mentioned already, but some stuff bothering me about LOS are:

- How does all that chain fit into the tiny handle of the combat cross, and also hold some mechanism to lock or pull upwards?

- How can the combat cross release its hook anytime Gabriel wants? I know he's the only one chosen to use it, but does he control it as if it was an extension of his body?

- How come it takes so many hits to kill something with it?? The other "versions" of the vampire killer whip usually lay out a skeleton in one strike. The combat cross takes 20 hits to kill a measly goblin, and it usually doesn't even stun most enemies. They just watch it hit them in the face like its a piece of string. This makes sense to me only if the combat cross doesn't have any holy power, and its just a regular metal weapon.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Flame on April 10, 2011, 05:41:30 PM
Because magnets.

because its a different style of gameplay.

Also, depends what vania you are playing. I recall LoI also requiring multiple whippings for enemies.

Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 10, 2011, 05:57:42 PM
- How does all that chain fit into the tiny handle of the combat cross, and also hold some mechanism to lock or pull upwards?

Video game mechanics. Nothing really is supposed to make sense in such a world. However since this game is more realistic the any NES, SNES or Genesis game then yeah, it's a little screwy to try and make a sensible explanation of that.

- How can the combat cross release its hook anytime Gabriel wants? I know he's the only one chosen to use it, but does he control it as if it was an extension of his body?

There could be some for of simplistic magic involved with this. The internal workings of the combat cross could be like that of a bag of holding. A bag of holding is a pocket dimension that allows you to store much more items then your standard backpack or belt bag without the weight effecting you in the slightest. The combat cross could have a pocket dimension infused into it in order to hold vast amounts of chain. AS for the rest of the mechanism, I'm going to assume it's part of some kind of enchantment or spell.

- How come it takes so many hits to kill something with it??

They over emphasized on their game mechanics to bring about a similar style of game play as seen in GoW IMO. It was not a smart move.

P.S. Welcome to the forums  ;)

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: JR on April 10, 2011, 06:05:39 PM
There could be some for of simplistic magic involved with this. The internal workings of the combat cross could be like that of a bag of holding. A bag of holding is a pocket dimension that allows you to store much more items then your standard backpack or belt bag without the weight effecting you in the slightest. The combat cross could have a pocket dimension infused into it in order to hold vast amounts of chain. AS for the rest of the mechanism, I'm going to assume it's part of some kind of enchantment or spell.


I always thought this would be the simplest and most effective way to explain having many items at once, if a gamer felt an explanation was necessary. I guess I never knew there was a term attached to it until now.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: xscientist5000 on April 11, 2011, 05:21:29 PM
Thanks for those explanations.. One other thing that always bothers me is that views of the castle from the outside never seem to match up to what you're seeing while in them.

-In CV64 the castle out in the lake doesn't have the clock tower... I'm guessing when you enter that castle you're actually entering some castle of another dimension (kind of like silent hill). So I'm assuming the castle in the real world is kind of just a gateway... The bitten villager at the villa says "this place swarms with demons, you have entered the castle of hell!!" or something like that. Maybe he was speaking literally?

-In SOTN you can see a bridge stairway leading up to the keep, but those stairs are actually broken off by the time Alucard enters the castle, or exits to the upside down castle. I know the castle is a "creature of chaos", but that's no excuse for not taking the time to fix bloopers like these.

-In Dracula X, you can see the castle far away in the background, AS YOU'RE ENTERING THE CASTLE. I don't think the following hallways are big enough to take you all the way over to that castle in the background, and up to the keep.

I know there are prob more instances of things like these. Let me know if you can think of any or have your own explanations, because things like these keep me up at night in a cold sweat.

Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Chernabogue on April 11, 2011, 05:26:10 PM
They may be simple errors with background pictures and stuff.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 11, 2011, 05:35:40 PM
-In Dracula X, you can see the castle far away in the background, AS YOU'RE ENTERING THE CASTLE. I don't think the following hallways are big enough to take you all the way over to that castle in the background, and up to the keep.


If all the hallways were to the side, then you might cross enough distance. Maybe.  What's hilarious is seeing the kepe in the background of the final stage.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on April 11, 2011, 11:20:59 PM
To be fair, DraculaXX doesn't have a Keep.
You seem to fight Dracula in an elevated section of SotN's Colloseum Stage (some tile even seem eerily similar, which is even weirder since SotN is supposed to follow Rondo, not DXX).
The tower you climb is either an illusion or some other weird thing.  The tower itself never ends (if you keep on going through the stage, you can actually get lost and repeat areas if you're not careful where you're going).

Check it out!  Isn't it similar at least in aesthetics & layout?

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.inverteddungeon.com%2Fjorgefuentes%2Fimages3%2Fdxxfinalstage1.jpg&hash=4da8616c409f625b3bfd35492d682e626a896858) and (https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.inverteddungeon.com%2Fjorgefuentes%2Fimages3%2Fdxxfinalstage2.jpg&hash=a67679d5d302c082511d193db169401fcafc121d)
versus
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.inverteddungeon.com%2Fjorgefuentes%2Fimages3%2Fsotncolloseum.png&hash=cb2610b49074a08573ac27255042d2cf5a7042db)


As for why you can see the Castle within the "Castle" last stage?  I think it's a design error.  The designers probably didn't want to scrap a pretty background like that so they kept it.  It was most likely supposed to go as a background for the Clock Tower stage (since the Clock tower is on the other side of the castle after a bridge, similar to the CV3 Clock Tower), but then realized they couldn't use it because all of the areas the Clock Tower stage used, had no open spots so you couldn't use it as a Vista for the castle at all.

Also, something tells me those stages weren't meant to be in that order originally, or that there was a plan to start, perhaps with Maria, on the opposite side of the stage and work your way in, or something.  We'll never know...
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 12, 2011, 12:45:55 AM
They could've used it in a segment of the burning town but never got around to it. IMO I think the developers were either too lazy, under a time constraint or didn't have enough budget to do things right the first time.

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on April 12, 2011, 12:57:16 AM
I'm thinking it's more of a Time Constraint.  Some of the backgrounds are very very VERY well done.

DraculaXX's Clock Tower is way better-looking and rustic than Rondo's, which looks blocky and, well, 8-bit (though I like the level design of Rondo's more, graphically DXX's is superior in the clockwork sections).
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 12, 2011, 01:24:01 AM
I completely agree.  And, adding to that (though I already said this), I think that fighting Death on the face of the clock tower like you do in Dracula X is much better than fighting him on some out-of-0place pirate ship that apparently floats in...an ocean...in the castle.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on April 12, 2011, 01:43:36 AM
Yeah I'm not sure what a ghost ship is doing in the foggy lake the Castle's on.  And in CV3, that lake seems to open up in to some kind of sea or something (and it seems to somewhat do that in Ecclesia as well).
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 12, 2011, 01:56:31 AM
Well, the big complaint I have about Rondo's level design is that apparently, in the alternate paths, Richter just sort of wanders miles out of his way before returning to the castle.  Things like the raft stage and the ghost ship are weirdly out of place, and leave you wondering how and when he got back to the castle, and why he ran away like that.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 12, 2011, 03:30:36 AM
And in CV3, that lake seems to open up in to some kind of sea or something (and it seems to somewhat do that in Ecclesia as well).

It's got to be the black sea since it's the only sea the touches the shores of Romania.

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 12, 2011, 04:27:43 AM
Something I want explained:

Flea Men reproduce by WakWak tree (they emerge fully clothed, no less!)

Each Wakwak tree produces a new fleaman roughly every 3-5 seconds.

Flea Men have existed at least as far back as Lament of Innocence, and likely are a natural species.


So, why doesn't the world look like this?
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi5.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy185%2FRidureyu%2Fforumstuff%2Ffleamanworld.png&hash=1bbd08e9da9888b80c57c02ec6a486f385e9c7a7)
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 12, 2011, 05:48:13 AM
Oh crap! That's like stage 4 from Contra: Hardcorps with all those stoneaxe-wielding monkeymen jumping you.

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Puwexil on April 12, 2011, 07:54:56 AM
Well, the big complaint I have about Rondo's level design is that apparently, in the alternate paths, Richter just sort of wanders miles out of his way before returning to the castle.  Things like the raft stage and the ghost ship are weirdly out of place, and leave you wondering how and when he got back to the castle, and why he ran away like that.

Stage 1's primary path leaves Richter at the gate of the castle. He proceeds through it, enters the building, and doesn't leave again for the rest of the game (ghost ship excepted, which is probably just docked at the castle and hey, let's go kill Death). However, if you take the alternate path, it leaves him at the beginning of the aqueduct, leading into stage 2'. You can see the castle far off in the distance, overlooking its usual lakeside cliff, appearing smaller than it does during the Wyvern fight in front of the castle gate.

The short of it is that by taking a wrong turn in Aljiba/Jova, Richter's path of progress is resigned to trekking the countryside until the point of reaching the castle. In effect, two paths he could've taken exist, both of which eventually meet at the ghost ship. Yes, there is a stage 5', but it can hardly be said to factor into the overall narrative of the game by its very nature as a cobbled-up patchwork of assets that one of the developers made just for the fun of it. That, and the game forcing you to enter the ghost ship during the initial playthrough, even if you take the alternate exit in stage 4'.

Of course, during the course of a playthrough you can cross over from the primary path to the alternate one and back. A concession made in the name of gameplay variety doesn't break the illusion of Rondo's world making a whole lot of sense, though. There are just two versions of it, hence dubbing the other set of stages "alternate" in the first place. Either one works.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: thernz on April 12, 2011, 02:36:19 PM
If you take Dracula X Stage 7's first background in account, Richter has somehow been walking away from the castle for the entire previous duration of the game too. Except he just totally makes it to Dracula's in this one stage! Plus, in the alternate route, he ends up exploring the underground Atlantis which somehow leads into the clock tower which seems to be set in a rocky cliff-side rather than the castle.
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F88deu.gif&hash=9995f695ec85b05f0f90493c150efb040f0e14ad)

so yeah
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Sindra on April 13, 2011, 07:57:07 PM
Plus, in the alternate route, he ends up exploring the underground Atlantis which somehow leads into the clock tower which seems to be set in a rocky cliff-side rather than the castle.

Well, there's always the possibility of portals or other temporal shifts that take you from one place to another that shouldn't by all accounts be next to the area you just left. It wouldn't be a huge stretch, considering the series has done warp rooms and shifts in space and so on. The concept of warps didn't show up until SotN due to the need to backtrack, however the same could be applied roughly to earlier games also. Walter had the ability to warp space with the Ebony Stone by making the area around the castle always night-time. The pure unfiltered chaos energies have been known to shift space around as well (like Aria of Sorrow), so it's not unusual if the areas surrounding the castle had effects like this happening also.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: DragonSlayr81 on April 14, 2011, 02:16:08 PM
Something I want explained:

Flea Men reproduce by WakWak tree (they emerge fully clothed, no less!)

Each Wakwak tree produces a new fleaman roughly every 3-5 seconds.

Flea Men have existed at least as far back as Lament of Innocence, and likely are a natural species.


So, why doesn't the world look like this?
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi5.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy185%2FRidureyu%2Fforumstuff%2Ffleamanworld.png&hash=1bbd08e9da9888b80c57c02ec6a486f385e9c7a7)

My theory about the Flea Men and Wak Wak Trees are this:

Flea Men existed as it's own species. A type of bloodthirsty psuedo-vampiric species(part flea, part man).

A mad scientist created Wak Wak Trees as a genetical experiment to create "clone Flea Men in massive numbers".

Wak Wak Trees don't as often as you say. They only start spawning Flea Men when a potential enemy is near. When the enemy is killed(or the tree is killed) and there is no lingering threat, it sits like a normal tree.

Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on April 14, 2011, 03:17:03 PM
FleaMan is a rather new name, too.

There seem to be four species of jumping nasty short monster:
1. Hunchbacks (CV1, CV3, X68000)
2. SabreTooth Rabbits (Akumajo Densetsu, Super Castlevania IV)
3. FleaMen (DraculaX, SotN, AoS, DoS, PoR)
4. Creepers (Belmonts' Revenge)

Hunchbacks are more like tiny zombie-looking Igors, with bald heads and hair on their upper neck (sort of like what the CryptKeeper looks like, only short and, well, hunchbacked)
SabreTooth Rabbits appear as counterparts to Hunchbacks in Akumajo Densetsu, and in Super Castlevania IV and do the exact same part.
Fleamen (or Rippers, for the dagger-throwing versions) seem to be mutants, and can appear in large numbers.  I suppose harpies can harvest them off of a WakWak tree and divebomb 'em in the proper zones, but I agree with DragonSlayr81 in that the tree probably only starts to spawn them when it senses some kind of moving object nearby (could be a Belmont, could be a Harpy).
Creepers come out of holes on the wall.  I think it's possible that they can come out of the earth like in "The Gate", or they're root-tree versions of Fleamen.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 14, 2011, 04:14:37 PM
What's with all this flea man business in CV? I'd rather have Igor back.

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 14, 2011, 04:15:06 PM
I always assumed fleamen were hunchbacks, but they changed the name to stop offending so many people.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on April 14, 2011, 05:00:47 PM
Hunchbacks are cooler, though.  They don't wear that gaudy green outfit with blue pants.  Yech! :P
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 14, 2011, 05:18:19 PM
And they have beards.

BTW, you know the NECA toys?  Ever notice how the Flea Man figure is basically the CV1 manual art done in Flea Man green/brown colors?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: kadosho on April 14, 2011, 05:49:48 PM
1) The stairs? I wonder why we've always had to take on these.
2) Platforms = They may knock us down, or even take us to pitfalls which lead to..
Which CV game do you think has the most nastiest traps of all time?
3) With new Belmonts' coming out of the woodwork, where does this place the VK whip?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: TheouAegis on April 14, 2011, 06:09:21 PM
Why hasn't Ecco the Dolphin made an appearance in the underground Atlantis yet?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Renonsgoods on April 14, 2011, 11:22:04 PM
FleaMan is a rather new name, too.

There seem to be four species of jumping nasty short monster:
1. Hunchbacks (CV1, CV3, X68000)
2. SabreTooth Rabbits (Akumajo Densetsu, Super Castlevania IV)
3. FleaMen (DraculaX, SotN, AoS, DoS, PoR)
4. Creepers (Belmonts' Revenge)

They also had a version of this enemy in Legacy of Darkness as well.  Anyone remember what they were called in that game?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on April 15, 2011, 02:37:34 AM
Oh that's right, but those were basically  hunchbacks.  They weren't their own type.  Take a hunchback and palette-swap him to goblin-green and you got the 3D Legacy of Darkness hunchbacks.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: narkolepsi on April 20, 2011, 02:23:47 PM
What a topic to come back to! Sindra, your explanations are lovely.

Now for some questions of my own...

In SoTN, was the Succubus' death sexual in nature (e.g. rape) or just the product of horrible voice acting?

Also, in Order of Ecclesia, did Shanoa get those glyphs when she entered Ecclesia (branded, tattooed) or did she have them when she was taken in? The marks look consistent with scarification, but I am still unsure.

There are probably more I can't quite recall at the moment.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 20, 2011, 04:09:21 PM
What a topic to come back to! Sindra, your explanations are lovely.

Now for some questions of my own...

In SoTN, was the Succubus' death sexual in nature (e.g. rape) or just the product of horrible voice acting?

Also, in Order of Ecclesia, did Shanoa get those glyphs when she entered Ecclesia (branded, tattooed) or did she have them when she was taken in? The marks look consistent with scarification, but I am still unsure.

There are probably more I can't quite recall at the moment.


1. Product of voice acting. Also, succubi pretty much always make inappropriate noises.

2. I assume she got the tattoos after "joining" Ecclesia as a little orphan kid.

3. Snape kills Dumbledore
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ahasverus on April 20, 2011, 04:24:27 PM
Total mortal kombat spoiler
Man, you are a dick.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 20, 2011, 04:29:06 PM
...I thought i had put in a spoiler tag.  Well, it's not a perfect spoiler, anyway
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: narkolepsi on April 20, 2011, 05:41:59 PM

1. Product of voice acting. Also, succubi pretty much always make inappropriate noises.

2. I assume she got the tattoos after "joining" Ecclesia as a little orphan kid.

3. Snape kills Dumbledore

1: Haha yeah. That much is true. What made me wonder, though, was why we don't see her die. She's the only one whose death we never see. That's what really struck me.

2: That seems plausible enough. The color and shading do make them look like brands.

3: "NOOOOOOO!"
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ahasverus on April 20, 2011, 08:44:51 PM
...I thought i had put in a spoiler tag.  Well, it's not a perfect spoiler, anyway
(click to show/hide)
I wasn't spoiled wahahah relax man, this is a Cv board so I can't blame you :P
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: darkwzrd4 on April 21, 2011, 12:08:47 AM
What a topic to come back to! Sindra, your explanations are lovely.

Now for some questions of my own...

In SoTN, was the Succubus' death sexual in nature (e.g. rape) or just the product of horrible voice acting?

Also, in Order of Ecclesia, did Shanoa get those glyphs when she entered Ecclesia (branded, tattooed) or did she have them when she was taken in? The marks look consistent with scarification, but I am still unsure.

There are probably more I can't quite recall at the moment.
1) Bad voice acting.  She is suppose to scream, not have an orgasm.
2) It isn't explained, but I assume that they appear when she absorbs glyph and probably change depending on what glyphs she uses.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: xscientist5000 on April 21, 2011, 04:55:45 AM
I think the voice acting fit. Shes supposed to sound seductive, and I actually liked all the voice acting in SOTN.

But her voice acting in LOI was terrible like most of the voice acting in that game, IMO. The conversations in general, its like, do people really talk like that? Maybe it was just bad translation..
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Pemburu Vampir on April 21, 2011, 05:44:13 AM
I wonder why Juste decorates a room in the castle that he is going to destroy anyway?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Flame on April 21, 2011, 09:45:21 AM
I wonder why Juste decorates a room in the castle that he is going to destroy anyway?
OCD?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 21, 2011, 02:52:29 PM
Now I have a mental picture of Juste obsessively washing his hands to get the germs off.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Chernabogue on April 21, 2011, 04:25:49 PM
I wonder why Juste decorates a room in the castle that he is going to destroy anyway?
I lol'd. That's so true and indeed stupid.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: DarkPrinceAlucard on April 21, 2011, 04:45:06 PM
I lol'd. That's so true and indeed stupid.

I wondered why he did that aswell.

Does seem pretty stupid when you think about it.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 21, 2011, 11:17:31 PM
Juste decorating an empty CV room was another useless IGA gimic. He could've had something else in there that would've vastly contributed to the actual game itself, but failed to do so.

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Puwexil on April 22, 2011, 02:15:33 AM
The furniture contributed plenty, by way of being thoroughly excellent. It's so quaint that I find it difficult to be bothered by it, had I the inclination in the first place.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Chernabogue on April 22, 2011, 01:37:06 PM
Why does the Creature/Frankenstein's Monster appear in the Castlevania timeline, BEFORE Dr. Frankenstein created it in the 17th/18th century?

It may be a simple confusion from the developpers, but I think I'd share it.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on April 22, 2011, 02:06:19 PM
I think you can just chalk that one up to "Rule of Cool".
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Chernabogue on April 22, 2011, 02:07:53 PM
I think you can just chalk that one up to "Rule of Cool".
Yeah, having Boris Karloff starring in CV isn't bad. :p
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: whitedragon_nall on April 22, 2011, 06:54:54 PM
I've always figured that The Creature's appearance in Castlevania still kinda makes sense since Mary Shelley's Frankenstein hasn't been confirmed as canon in the timeline. We can't include those events since they technically never happened. I've just assumed he was 'created' on a different date in the timeline...unless there is a bestiary entry that says otherwise.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: darkwzrd4 on April 22, 2011, 08:00:39 PM
I've always figured that The Creature's appearance in Castlevania still kinda makes sense since Mary Shelley's Frankenstein hasn't been confirmed as canon in the timeline. We can't include those events since they technically never happened. I've just assumed he was 'created' on a different date in the timeline...unless there is a bestiary entry that says otherwise.
Well, they never say it's Frankenstein's monster.  They just call it the creature.  I doubt that there was just one mad scientist experimenting with the idea of artificial life.  Especially in Dracula's castle.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 22, 2011, 08:03:51 PM
He was Frankenstein way back in the first few games...

...But they also had "hunchbacks," and all.  I'm still pretty certain tha tthe switch to 'flea men" was out of a desire to stop, y'know, offending people.  It's kind of like why D&D has the following:

Drow: Evil subrace of elves. Big identifying feature is black skin.

Duergar: Evil subrace of dwarves. Big identifying feature is black skin.

Svirfneblin: Not evil, but unpelasant subrace of gnomes. Big identifying feature is dark brown skin.

???  Humans do not have an evil, dark-skinned subrace.  GEE, I WONDER WHY.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: knightmere on April 22, 2011, 08:05:37 PM
I would like to know if Barlowe was actually a evil character or was corrupted by Dominus as some have suspected.  OoE had a very interesting plot, but this is a rather glaring hole that should have been explained.  
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 22, 2011, 08:10:37 PM
It could go either way.  I assumed he had been corrupted, but was always one of those "For the greater good" people, which is what gave Dracula an inroad.  You know, this is the fellow who thought nothing of grabbing a random orphan kid and tattooing her full of doom magic.  That, and there are lots of references to Ecclesia once being a fairlyy decent size (Shanoa is "one of the female spellcasters," for example), but clearly by the time of the game, it's down to three people.  They probably quit as he got more and more extreme over the years.  But this is all just my interpretation.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 23, 2011, 03:17:31 AM
Huh  Humans do not have an evil, dark-skinned subrace.  GEE, I WONDER WHY.

That's because evil comes from within and that makes us far more dangerous then most evil races in the D&D universe.

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Chernabogue on April 23, 2011, 05:33:13 AM
I would like to know if Barlowe was actually a evil character or was corrupted by Dominus as some have suspected.  OoE had a very interesting plot, but this is a rather glaring hole that should have been explained.  
I think Barlowe was rather mad since the very beginning of OoE. He'd be a dark priest, like Shaft, hiding in secret and trying to get Dracula back. Dominus may have made him go completely mad in the end, but it may bot have been the main source of his madness. It could also been Drac's soul, trapped in the same room.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: A-Yty on April 24, 2011, 06:00:46 PM
Why does the Creature/Frankenstein's Monster appear in the Castlevania timeline, BEFORE Dr. Frankenstein created it in the 17th/18th century?

It may be a simple confusion from the developpers, but I think I'd share it.

Dracula's Magic  8)
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: A-Yty on April 24, 2011, 06:01:55 PM
He was Frankenstein way back in the first few games...

But was it a translation or the original Japanese name? I'd guess it was the former.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Renonsgoods on April 24, 2011, 06:44:03 PM
I think it's safe to say...at this point...that most of the classical monsters that appear in CV are not meant to be the "original" incarnations of those creatures (Frankenstein, Medusa, the mermen.......hell, Dracula himself).  We really shouldn't be trying to tie these Castlevania versions in with their literature/mythical/cinematic versions as part of the same canon.  We're still dealing with the messy aftermath of Bram Stoker's story being dragged......kicking and screaming.....into Castlevania's continuity.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 24, 2011, 06:50:04 PM
I just want to know what Slogra(Berrigan?) and Gaibon are supposed to be.
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 25, 2011, 12:49:11 AM
I just want to know what Slogra(Berrigan?) and Gaibon are supposed to be.

I heard Slogra being described as a 'Dinosaur Knight', but more recently in CoD, Slogra is mentioned as a servant of Death. Gaibon is a Gargoyle. He was never mentioned as being anything else then Slogra's buddy or companion in battle.

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Ridureyu on April 25, 2011, 01:15:25 AM
Yeah, but do they have any mythological background whatsoever?
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: X on April 25, 2011, 04:24:31 AM
Not for Slogra I'm sure, but Gaibon is a Gargoyle like any other we've all heard about.

-X
Title: Re: Things not explained but you'd like to know in Castlevania
Post by: Chernabogue on April 25, 2011, 09:58:30 AM
Yeah, but do they have any mythological background whatsoever?
I read times ago that Slogra was a dragon in Scandinavian mythology.